The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Three Strikes and You’re Out: The Implementation and Impart of Strike Laws Author(s): James Austin Ph.D. ; John Clark ; Patricia Hardyman Ph.D. ; D. Alan Henry Document No.: 181297 Date Received: March 6, 2000 Award Number: 96-CE-VX-0009 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. “THREE STRIKES AND YOU’RE OUT” THE IMPLEMENTATION AND IMPACT OF STRIKE LAWS Submitted by James Austin, Ph.D. John Clark Patricia Hardyman, Ph.D. D. Alan Henry -,, . ...’, ... b ;. .., 1. - ..., This project was supported by Grant No. 96-CE-VX-0009awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Abstract Over the past few years 24 states and Congress have passed legislation under the slogan of “Three Strikes and You’re Out.” As part of the general political thrust to mandate increasingly tougher prison terms for repeat offenders, this form of legislation seeks to ensure that habitual offenders receive the toughest sentence available to the state absent the death penalty - life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. This report reviews the impact these laws have had on crime and the criminal justice system. Surprisingly, with the noted exception of California, there has been virtually no impact on the courts, local jails or state prisons. Nor does there appear to be an impact on crime rates. Even in California where the law was expected to have a major impact it appears that all of the projections were in error. The report proffers that this form of legislation was carefully crafted to be largely symbolic. However, the gross errors in predicting the impact of these and other laws by some of the most prestigious researchers underscore how little we know about change within the criminal justice system. The common theme that emerges from this report is that the impact of three strikes has been less than anticipated, as the courts, and in particular the prosecutors, have taken steps to minimize the potential effects of the new laws. -1- This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 THE THREE STRIKES AND YOU’RE OUT MOVEMENT ....... -1- CHAPTER 2 THE VARIOUS FORMS OF THREE STRIKES LEGISLATION ... -5- CHAPTER 3 A CLOSER LOOK AT THE THREE STRIKES LAWS IN WASHENGTON. CALIFORNIA. AND GEORGIA .............. -15- CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................. -23- CHAPTER 5 IMPACT ON THE COURTS ............................... -32- CHAPTER 6 THE IMPACT ON LOCAL JAILS ........................... -65- CHAPTER 7 IMPACT ON STATE PRISON SYSTEMS .................... -77- CHAPTER 8 IMPACT ON CRIME RATES .............................. -98- .. -11- This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. List of Tables TABLE 1 Variations in State Strikeable Laws .............................................. -9- TABLE 2 Comparison of New Strike Laws with Pre-Existing Sentencing Provision ................12- TABLE 3 Washington, California, and Georgia Strikeable Offenses ........................... -22- TABLE 4 Los Angeles Strike Sample ................................................... -26- TABLE 5 Sample Selection of Cases with Strike Charges ................................... -29- TABLE 6 Georgia Counties’ Strike Sample. .............................................. -29- TABLE 7 Felony Jury Trials In Superior Court ........................................... -37- TABLE 8 Comparison of Selected Counties on use of Second and Third Strikes as of May 31, 1997 .. .-39- TABLE 9 Superior Court Felony Case Filings Kern, San Francisco, and Los Angeles ..............-40- TABLE 10 Superior Court Jury Trials San Francisco, Kern, and Los Angeles ..................... -41- TABLE 11 Court Dispositions of Felony Cases Filed as Two and Three Strike Cases in Kern County ...-45- TABLE 12 .Pre-Trial Release and Bail Amounts (Los Angeles County) ........................ -49- TABLE 13 Municipal Court Dispositions Los Angeles County ................................ -50- TABLE 14 Adjudication Type and Time Till Adjudications 1992 and 1994 Cohorts. ................-52- ... -111- This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. TABLE 15 First and Second Strike Cases to Total Felony Filings in the Three Georgia Counties .......-60- TABLE 16 First Strike Offenses by Charge in the Three Georgia Counties .......................-61- TABLE 17 Number and Percent of Defendants Charges with a First Strike ....................... -62- TABLE 18 Reason for Detention of the First Strike Cases in the Three Georgia Counties ............-62- TABLE 19 Court Dispositions of One and Two Strike Cases in the Three Georgia Counties. .........-63- TABLE 20 Time to Adjudication in the Three Georgia Counties ............................... .-64- TABLE 21 Average Daily Population of Unsentenced Inmates in California Jails 1986-1 998 ........ -68- TABLE 22 Average Length of Stay in California Jails in Days. ............................... -71- TABLE 23 Comparison of Los Angeles County Jail Bookings ................................ -72- TABLE 24 Average Length of Stay in the Los Angeles County Jail by Status ..................... -72- TABLE 25 California Prison Population Projections 1994-1 998 ............................... -80- TABLE 26 Number of Second and Third Strike Cases Admitted to.CDC By Month ............... -8 1- TABLE 27 Comparison of Washington, California, and Georgia Prison Admissions ............... -84- TABLE 28 Type of Crime for California Two and Three Strikers Admitted to Prison ............... -85- -iv- This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. TABLE 29 Comparison of Striker and Non-Striker Inmates Admittcd to the California Prison System . -87- TABLE 30 Classification Attributes of Second and Third Strikers .............................. -88- TABLE 3 1 Selccted Descriptions of the Current Offenses by Third Strikers ...................... -90- TABLE 32 Escape and Serious Incident Reports 1990-1998 ................................... -94- f TABLE 33 California Correctional Costs for Strikers ‘and Non-Strikers 1996 ..................... -97- TABLE 34 Violent and Property Crime Rates by State 1990-1996 ............................. -107- This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. CHAPTER 1 THE THREE STRIKES AND YOU’RE OUT MOVEMENT In 1993, an initiative was placed on the ballot in the state of Washington to require a term of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for persons convicted for a third time of certain specified violent or serious felonies. This action was fueled by the tragic death of Diane Ballasiotes, who was murdered by a convicted rapist who had been released from prison. Shortly thereafter, Polly Klass was kidnaped and murdered by a California-released inmate, who also had an extensive prior record of violence. The rallying cry of “three-strikes-and-you’re-out” caught on, not only with Washington and California voters, who passed their ballot measures by wide margins, but with legislatures and the public throughout the country. By 1997,24 other states and the Federal government enacted laws using the “three-strikes-and-you’re-out” phrase. In 1994, President Clinton received a long-standing ovation in his State of the Union speech when he endorsed three strikes as a federal sentencing policy.’ The three strikes movement is the most recent anti-crime policy to sweep the United States. Such reforms have included